Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 22:09:41 12/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 12, 2003 at 23:31:41, Slater Wold wrote: >On December 12, 2003 at 21:37:14, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>On December 12, 2003 at 20:09:23, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On December 12, 2003 at 17:26:04, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>> >>>>I was wondering if it may be better to track the stats by trillions of moves >>>>done instead of on a block by block basis. Because the current way doesn't seem >>>>as if it'd be completely fair. For example.. lets say computer X is twice as >>>>fast as computer Y. However, computer Y completes two smaller blocks in the same >>>>time it takes computer X to do one. Now the stats report that computer Y has >>>>done two blocks, looking like it is twice as fast as computer X when actually >>>>the reverse is true. Just something to think about. Thanks for the project, I >>>>always love the distributed stuff. :) >>> >>>Good point. My P4 2.0Ghz laptop worked on the same problem (set) for 6 hours... >>> >>>My P4 3.06Ghz finished one in 20 minutes. >> >>Seems my computers are getting the longer problems now.. that what you're >>seeing? Even with one of my 2.5's pulling 230,000knps I'm getting 3000-4000 >>second (last one was 3460 seconds) blocks. > >Last problem: > >97096137599 nodes in 624.76 seconds (155412Knps). > >I was doing a bunch of other stuff while this one was running. Probably would >have only taken 400s - 500s at full speed. Hmm.. bad luck for me then I guess. It's going full speed.. I'm just getting the HUGE blocks for some reason.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.